Architecture Design Studio: Air - Journal

Studio Journal_

Djuro Djuranovic / 836908 Tutorial #8 / Finn Warnock

Architecture Design Studio: Air ABPL30048_

Part A_

A.0. Introduction

Hello, my name is Djuro, and welcome to my journal. Before we delve into the journal, here is a little something about me. I am a student in the second year of the Bachelor of Environments course, majoring in Construction and Architecture. I previously studied architecture at the University of Belgrade in Serbia, and then a year and a half ago, came to Melbourne. Apart from architecture and construction, I’m interested in all types of design disciplines and how they can inform each other. What I am most interested in architecture is the unique connection man has with the house that has developed over the ages on a conscious but also an unconscious level. I believe that understanding this ancient relationship is what leads to good architecture, and ultimately, happier lives. I am very much looking forward to how this subject will expand my understanding of architecture and the tools that can be used for its conception. I have yet to fully understand the digital aspect of architecture and how advanced use of programs can inform my own design, since the only way i have used the computer is for documenting something already concieved through analogue tools. On the next page you can see some highlights of my previous work.

Figure 1

Figure 2

Figure 3

Figure 4

Conceptual Models

Figure 5

Studio project: Second skin

Figure 7

Figure 6

Studio project: Single family dwelling

Studio project: Lighthouse

A.1. Design Futuring Precedent Project: Lenin Institute of Library Sciences / Year Designed: 1927 / Architect: Ivan Leonidov

Precedent Project: Josey Pavilion / Year Completed: 2014 / Architect: Lake|Flato Architects / Location: Decatur, Texas, USA

During the years following the Great War, the construction industry in Russia completely stagnated.

This meant that architects were left to realise their design on paper, which prepared the fertile ground from which extreamly creative and original architecture was able to evolve. Ivan Leonidov was definitely the most formaly inovative architect of the period. But that is not the main reason I chose this project of his as a precedent. His Lenin Institute was his final diploma project and remained unbuilt, but represented prophecy of what Leonidov thought was the architecture of the future.

The Josey Pavilion was comissioned by the Dixon Water Association, a non profit organisation whose goal it is to save the natural prarie landscape of Texas that has been threatened by the overgrazing of livestock and other unsustainable practices. Their strategy is to educate farmers and ranchers about the impact of sustainable land management, how it can positively impact the environment, sustain economic viability and improve the quality of life for their comunities.2

Like for the rest of his generation, the inspiring effect of the industrial revolution was prevalent and invited architects to imagine the future of man where his organic life would be integrated with the technological advancements of the new century. This project was completely saturated with the use of technology. From the presence of advanced services like conveyor belts for an automated library, mobile walls and telecomunicational equimpent to structural systems that were mostly speculative, since structures of that height were yet to be built. The fact that this architecture was to stay on paper, allowed the architect to push the limits on what was achievable, but also freely imaginet what would be needed by people in the years to come. Innovative in its form as well as in its use of technology, Leonidov also shocked his contemporaries with his use of radically simple forms, another characteristic of the “new age”.

This project is particularly interesting because it gives us insight into how architects of the 1920s saw the future, which values were outdated and to be left behind, and the new type of life that architecture was supposed to provide a framework for.1

Apart from a place that educates, it is also a multifunctional meeting space, providing networking and suport for local communities. The building itself is very responsibly built, using sustainable, locally sourced materials, and taking into account the surrounding wildlife. It also integrates innovative water and energy systems and passive design, passing the Living Building Challenge. Also, the architecture is of a very open design, cherishing the surrounding landscape and fostering mans connection to nature. This centre devoted to the spreading of “design intelligence”3 becomes the embodiment of the relationship towards nature the Dixon Water Foundation advocates.

The Josey pavilion is an example of contemporary architecure that inspires but also teaches architects to think about the ethical implications of the architecture being created today, and its impact on the course of our lives tomorrow. I chose this contemporary example of architecture as a contrast to the first, to show how different our architecture has become as a result of the change of the goals and ideals we have today. It is also a statement of how responsible architecture has become in the sense that it is no longer designed to be the framework of our lives, but also a tool for further solidifying the future that we want.

1. Andrei Gozak, Andrei Leonidov, Ivan Leonidov : the complete works (London: Academy, 1988).

2. American Institute of Architects, The Dixon Water Foundation Josey Pavilion (2017) <http://www.aiatopten.org/node/476> [accessed 11 August 2017].

3. Tony Fry, Design Futuring: Sustainability, Ethics and New Practice (Oxford: Berg, 2008).

Figure 9

Figure 8

Lenin Institute: Predicting the future Josey Pavilion: Securing the future

Figure 10

Figure 10

A.2. Design Computation Fractals, a graphical representation of a mathematic expression whose characteristic is that its parts (fractures) share the same statistical data as the whole.

Fractals ocur naturally in our world, taking form in all parts of nature. It is no wonder that this facinating natural phenomenon is an inspiration to architects.

Fractal repetion of forms has been used in architecture long before computers were invented, some of the best examples being structures like Angkor Wat. However, it was not until computation methods were developed

enough that architects started to experiment with algorithms and started gaining a deeper appreciation of how fractals work and where their use in architecture actually lies. The limiting factor of this experimentation is that the formulation of these fractals is very form-driven. The shapes achieved are purely excercises in form, rather than a creation of spaces for social structures nad functional needs. Therefore, the application of fractals in architecture tends to be limited to the esthetic level, primarily to facade solutions.4

Precedent project: National Science & Innovation Centre of Lithuania / Year Designed: 2016 / Architect: Mark Foster Gage Architects

Precedent project: Lideta Market / Year Completed: 2014 / Architect: Vilalta Arquitectura / Location: Adis Ababa, Ethiopia

This project was awarded an honorable mention in the competition for Lithuania’s “Science Island”. Mark Foster Architects are particularly interested in the use of fractals, and have integrated them in a number of their projects. Here, the fractal geometry is used in order to provide a number of layers to the elevations, adding a fourth dimension to the architecture, since different forms are recognised at different proximities to the building. This continuous revelation of new details of the architecture is supposed to challenge the occupants pereption of the architecture, and how they percieve thier scale relative to the scale of the building.

The idea is that this experience inspires a feeling of mystery and curiosity that is supposed to be a metaphore for the research that would take place inside. Computer-generated fractals can help to easily achieve this high level of geometric complexity, but this project also testifies that they can also be used to cause a certain emotion, and challenge our perception of architecture.6

This precedent takes inspiration from traditional Ethiopian pattern designs found on fabrics. This traditional pattern is then reinterpreted through the lens of fractal geometry, to create a rationally defined facade, while still registering with the native observer on a subconscious level. The facade also positively impacts the buildings energy performance, controlling natural light and ventilation. Here lies a hint of how computation can allow us to reimagine traditional motifs in order to align them with the contemporary paradigm. It also serves as evidence that the formal aproach of derivation of fractals can be integrated with more functional aspects of the design.5

4. Michael J. Ostwald, Josephine Vaughan, The fractal dimension of architecture (Cham: Birkhäuser, 2016).

5. Kate Torgovnick May, Architecture infused with fractals: how TED speaker Ron Eglash inspired architect Xavier Vilalta (2013) <http://blog.ted.com/architecture-infused-with-fractals-ron-eglash-and-xavier-vilalta/> [accessed 11 August 2017].

6. Mark Foster Gage, Architecture that Challenges your Concept of Reality, (2016) <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7v5hmQt57lc> [accessed 11 August 2017].

Figure 12

Figure 11

Science Island: Achieving new effects Lideta Market: Reinterpreting tradition

Figure 13

Figure 14

A.2. Design Computation As a contrast to previous precedents I wanted to choose some that reflect how computation has been used in architecture not only for creation of new forms, but also for solving more practical issues. The two spheres I chose to focus on in my precedents are fabrication and energy performance. Development of software has speeded up and in some cases even eliminated many time-intensive tasks which has resulted in the designer having more time to dedicate themselves to developing the design and moving freely between the various design stages. It has also bridged the gap between representation and materialisation, giving architects more control over the fabrication process and

reinvolving them in the physical phases of building.7 On the other hand, once the building is built, energy performance of a building has beome one of the main focuses of architecture. Whether it is for establishing feasability or the impact on the environment, computation has allowed for complex data analysis, helping us understand better how our buildings will perform after they are built, and what could be done during the design stage to positively impact that performance. Computational methods majorly affected architecture on a number of levels, and continues to today, making us reavaluate what architecture is, and the roles designers play within it.8

Precedent Project: Media-ICT / Year Completed: 2010 / Architect: Enric Ruiz Geli / Location: Barcelona, Spain

Precedent Project: TWIST / Year Built: 2016 / Architect: Architectural Association School of Architecture / Location: Timber Expo, Birmingham

The development of advanced data analysis through daylight modelling has really helped us understand how natural light impacts the comfort of the inside environment of buildings and how that impact is reflected on energy usage. This type of solar analysis becomes particularly important in commercial buildings, since the majority of the buildings energy is used on cooling and this results in large expenses that could be decreased with a smart utilisation of shading.

Dynamic facades are stil a relatively new concept and are not that common, but it certainly seems it will be a popular idea in the future of environmentally responsible design.10 Apart form daylight modeling, sensors can be used to track the behaviour of the sun and its impact on the building. Dynamic facades can then respond to that behaviour in a way that controlls the comfort of the internal environment of the building, and minimises energy usage. This precedent is only one example of what implementation of smart BMS could look like, and how it can influence architectural design.

Usually computation may be used only to fabricate elements or assemble them in a particular way.

However, this approach allowed for a free flow of information between different aspects of the design the material characteristics on one side, and the finding of form on the other. TWIST is a structure designed (and built) by students as an experimentation of the properties of milled plywood through 1:1 tests.

Computational techniques used to generate the form were calibrated and tuned based on the results of physical experiments on plywood strips.9 It also serves as a nutshel example of how architects can be involved in all stages of the construction process, from inception to realisation, the direct product being a 1:1 structure, rather than an architectural model.

7. Lisa Iwamoto, Digital fabrications: architectural and material techniques (New York: Princeton Architectural Press, 2009).

8. Branko Kolarevic, Architecture in the digital age: design and manufacturing (New York: Spoon Press, 2003).

9. Eric Oh, EmTech TWISTs Plywood at the Timber Expo in Birmingham (2015) <http://www.archdaily.com/775842/emtechs-twist-displayed-at-the-timber-expo-in-birmingham> [accessed 11 August 2017].

10. Construction Specialties Inc, Adaptive and Dynamic Buildings â&#x20AC;&#x201C; The Future of Environmental Design & Architecture (2010) <http://www.archdaily.com/71450/adaptive-and-dynamic-buildings-%25e2%2580%2593-the-future-of-environmental-design-architecture> [accessed 11 August 2017].

Figure 15

Figure 16

Media-ICT: Shadow mapping TWIST: From inception to manufacturing

Figure 17

Figure 18

A.3. Composition / Generation The contemporary architect is present to a shift in design approach. Architecture is moving from passive to generative design tools, implementing algorithmic thinking in its designs. This means that the architect becomes the creator not of the form, but of the process that generates the form. It could be said that this approach of finding form is more logical or mathematical compared to the traditional method of the arhcitect-composer, deriving the form dirrectly from his own intuition and knowledge. Both approaches are used in contemporary architecture, and both have known pros and cons. Since I think the traditional design approach has enough evidence to back up its validity, with my precedents I will try to focus on the benefits of generative design and where its application

can be found in contemporary architecture. One can argue that this new approach of algorithmic design is limited by its abiding to defined rules. However, in my oppinion, it should be seen as a tool that augments the designers capabilities and can even help derive new concepts, since the results of computational design can certainly be unexpected. There is something of nature in this idea of creating algorithms, since our natural environment is shaped in a similar way by a complex set of intertwining processes. An example were this connection is very tangible is in, for instance, evolutionary structural optimisation through algorithms. But it is definitely also obvious in all the new designs of recent years that are inherently organic in form, and sometimes even in logic.11

Precedent Project: Thallus Installation / Year Built: 2017 / Architect: Zaha Hadid Architects

Precedent Project: Columns / Year Designed: 2010 / Architect: Michael Hansmeyer

Thallus is an experiment in creating a structure with a single continuous curve that is guided on a surface by an algorithm in order to create a continuous surface of a specific grometry. Like in the previous precedent, some input information is provided. In this instance it is information regarding the density and bundling of the curve in specific areas, as well as parameters that allow for the fabrication of the surface. This precedent is an example of how parametric design can also be used to create a structural system of desired characteristics, whiles still achieving a certain visual effect. What is exciting about this design apart from its original form, is the suggested possibilities of implementing this algorithm in other areas of the architecture, construction and engineering industries.13

This precedent reimagines the oldest architectural archetype - the column. A new order of columns is derived through experimentation with a subdivision manipulation algorithm. The starting point is a mesh of an abstracted doric column, which is subdivided. In the input form information about the proportions of the columns is provided in order for the process to be controlled. The end result is an intriguing and ornamental form. Here a traditional archetype is reinterpreted and through a process that could be called â&#x20AC;&#x153;unbiasedâ&#x20AC;? a form is created that is outside the conceptual abilities of a human mind.12

11. Brady Peters, 'Computation works : the building of algorithmic thought ', Architectural design, 83.2, (2013), (p. 8).

12. Michael Hansmeyer, Michael Hansmeyer Computational Architecture (2017) <http://www.michael-hansmeyer.com> [accessed 11 August 2017].

13. Zaha Hadid Architects, Thallus Installation (2017) <http://www.zaha-hadid.com/design/thallus-installation/> [accessed 11 August 2017].

Figure 19

Figure 20

Thallus: Parametric structure Collums: Parametric shape

Figure 21

Figure 22

A.4. Conclusion In Part A we talked about the role architecture plays in setting up the framework for our future, as well as the development of contemporary design tools. The first part talks in my oppinion mostly about the ethical implications of design... â&#x20AC;&#x153;...designed things go on designing (be they designed to do so or not)â&#x20AC;? as Tony Fry stated in our reading. It is essential to understand the important role design has in shaping our futures and I think we should always design with out best future in mind. The second part talks about new, generative

design tools and how they have served to augment our designing skills, while allowing us more control over the fabrication process. I think ithat we are always moving towards a future of ever increasing complexity of thought and that these complex design tools will be necessary in order to support the new paradigms in architecture. I also believe that they can help us achieve unbiased, original forms we have not even dreamed about.

A.5. Learning Outcomes At the beginning of the semester, I had a general idea of what architectural computing is, but now I have a much deeper apreciation of what architectural computing actually is, and an idea of how broad the use of computation in architecture can actually be. I still cannot say I fully understand its role within the discipline and industry, but I think that that is normal since it is still a relatively young concept and is still developing. I am definitely excited to further investigate the possibilities of coputing through my design. I also

believe I could have definitely implemented computing in some of my past work to one degree or another. A specific example of an interesting application would be the in Water Studio project I did. The brief is centred around an individual master of architecture and I was in the studio studying the work of Le Corbusier. I think it would definitely be interesting to investigate how formal and theoretical approaches that are characteristic to him could be combined with the contemporary possibilities of computing.

Part B_

B.1. Research Field Research field - Strips and Folding When researching precedents for this research field I discovered that implementing this technique in the design process offered a wide range of possible forms and effects. If we think of architecture as the articulation of space, the challenge that presents itself is defining that space using the manipulation and multiplication of 2D elements. As the precents I have listed here show, there is an endless variety of how to go about providing a solution to this challenge. Depending on the approach, different effects are achieved.

The area of the field I was particularly interested in was the use of strips, intrigued by the clever examples of how they can be used to materialise architectural elements. In the case of the Paradise Drive by HATZ Architects, the strips join together and through a series of folds in space, roughly define the spacial organisation of the house. Double Agent White by Marc Fornes / Theverymany demonstrates how a system of division can be used to define a geometric boundary of any shape. One set of rule defines the shape of the stripps, while the other defines the seemingly random perforations that allow visual communication between the inside of the geometry and the surrounding environment.

Gramazio and Kohlerâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Uster public toilets feature facades that, with a simple fold of strip elements, expands the variety of colour shades featured on the facade through the play of light and shadow. It is an example of how strips can be used to capture micro-spaces in a surface-like element, producing an effect of depth.

These and various other precedents provide insight into the wide architectural possibilities of this technique. By choosing the parameters, an approach is selected. For instance - depending on the scale of the strips, a choice between space enclosure and surface treatment can be made.

01

Considering the fabrication process, multiple techniques present themselves as logical solutions for connecting 2D strip-like elements. I have documented my exploration of these connections below. It is particularly in this sphere of the research field that some overlapping with the sectioning research field occurs. These similarities provides an area for potential future exploration.

The other issue is how the elements themselves could be fabricated. What I find the most rational and at the same time challenging, is how these strips made from 2D materials can be used to produce a spatial composition. However, this kind of obstacle could definitely be overcome by the use of 3D printing tools.

Figure 1

Figure 3

Figure 5

Figure 2

Figure 4

Figure 6

B.2. Case study 1.0 Case study - Seroussi Pavillion by Biothing The algorithm for the pavilion relies on two major components - “Evaluate Field” and “Graph Mapper” to produce its unique form. To alter the script I focused on manipulating the relationship between these two components.

Using this technique, a multitude of forms can be derived, however, having the brief in mind, I explored how the strips could be used to construct a structurally stable system, while focusing on surface creation rather than generating a certain form. The potential I saw in this script was the possibility to create a skin that does not rely on rigid geometry in order to achieve structural integrity. The results obrained from this approach achieved an intricate, almost lattice-like effect. The seemingly random (or in the case of species 02 truly random) arrayed elements also added to the natural-looking, growth-inspired logic.

Points

Point Charges

List Length

Merge Fields

Range

Divide Curve

Graph Mapper

Species 03

Vector

Field evaluation projected onto freeform surface

Move

Interpolate Simplified algorithmic template

03

Original script

Species 02

A “network” of interconected elements was in fact the goal to be achieved.

The four best examples highlighted on the next page are the ones that seemed most rational and simple to fabricate. These solutions are imagined to be examples of rules used to create an enclosure system, or can even be reduced to provide a simple pattern to be applied to any appropriate part of the design proposal.

Species 01

Point charges located at random points on sphere

Species 04 Points for curve interpolation defined with different functions

Functions used

B.2. Case study 1.0

Force Type Point Charge Circle Radius Small Bezier Span S Curve

Centre Charge Negative Charge strength Strong

Strip Number Force Type Decay

Centre Charge Negative Charge strength Medium

10 Positive Point Charge High

Bezier span

Force Type Point Charge Circle Radius Medium Bezier Span Conic Convex

Force Type Point Charge Circle Radius Small Bezier Span Conic Concave

Force Type Point Charge Circle Radius Large Bezier Span Conic Concave

Centre Charge Positive Charge strength Medium

Strip Number Force Type Decay

10 Positive Point Charge Low

Power

Curves mirrored in sphere surface

Strip Number Force Type Decay

30 +ve and -ve Point Charge High

Sine

Force Type Spin Force Circle Radius Medium Bezier Span Conic Convex

Curves mirrored in sphere surface Without appropriate data structure

Strip Number Force Type Decay

10 Spin Force Low

Perlin

04

B.3. Case study 2.0 Case study - Botswana Innovation Hub While going through the supplied precedent examples, the Botswana Innovation Hub by SHoP Architects stood out to me as an appropiate project to reverse engineer, since I recognised that the techniques I learnt in case study 1.0 could possibly be applied to generate this kind of form as well.

Figure07

The Botwana Innovation Hub is a science and technology park devoted to supporting innovation and entrepreneurship. It is composed out of three main, parallel wings that are connected by multiple bridges. The strips of the facade connect the long, horizontal floor plates. Through these layers, it is suggested that the architecture was shaped by some kind of natural stratification process rather than constructed by man. These connections combine the building into an elegent and cohesive form.

In reverse engineering the project, I chose to focus on modeling only one wing, since generating the whole structure would follow the same general logic. For the strips I lofted three curves each, to produce strips that are triangular in section. In the original project the architect did however use more than three curves to generate more complex sections.

Figure 7

Figure08

Figure 8 N1 defines curve Z coordinate N2 defines number of points for interpolation N3 defines maximum movement of points

Curve1 Move N1

UnitZ

Curve3

Divide N2 Range

Graph Mapper

Move Multiplication

UnitZ

Loft

Curve2

N3

This an example of the code if only one of the curves is being interpolated, while the other two are just referenced.

In certain cases, two or even all three curves could be transformed for interpolation.

B.3. Case study 2.0

Reverse engineered model render - isometric views and elevation

P01

P02

P03

Phases of strip generation

P04

P05

06

B.4. Technique: Development Design Development I proceeded to alter my script again by focusing on the â&#x20AC;&#x153;Graph Mapperâ&#x20AC;? component, altering the number of elements, their dimensions, the distance between them, the defining function, and the base geometry. In the end, I switched to 2D by generating curves in a grid framework, using the grid dimensions

Randomly reduced and non uniform y-axis scaling

Randomly reduced

Culled with pattern

Curves from all nodes

Bezier Span

Power

Sine

as adjustable parameters. As I mentioned earlier, I was interested in how these curves could be defined in order to populate a surface.

Later, in the fabrication process, the curves could be replaced by phisical strips to create a structure.

Gausian

Perlin

Interpolation with various functions, opened / closed typology

Circular base geometry

Interpolation with bezier span

Straight, horizontal strips

B.4. Technique: Development

Number of rings 2 Typology Open

Number of rings 2 Typology Closed

Number of rings 5 Typology Open

Number of rings 4 Typology Open

Number of rings 3 Typology Closed

Open

Closed

Number of rings 2 Strips Horizontal Typology Open

Sine

Parabola

Number of rings 3 Number of rings 3 Strips Horizontal Strips Curved Typology Closed Typology Open

Number of rings 4 Strips Curved Typology Open

Number of rings 4 Strips Horizontal Typology Closed

Power

Linear

Sine (higher frequency)

Sine summation

B.5. Technique: Prototypes Prototype Fabrication At this point of the design development, I teamed up with Holly to fuse together what I have leared during my experiments with strip configurations with Hollyâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s biomimetic hexagonal patterning.

While the overall geometry and organisation of space in our design proposal remains something to be explored in Part C, we focused on devising what could present a secion of the partitioning system we would use in our acoustic pod. Since biomimicry was the base of our conceptual approach, we turned to examples of how nature forms protective barriers in the forms of membranes and tissues to inform the set of rules we would use in creating our structure. The goal was to demonstrate concepts of growth and interconnection in creating a cavity wall for sound insulation.

We would start by defining the hexagonal cells, and the centroids of each cell would become the fixing point to the network of strips beneath.

We lined the underside of the hexagonal cells with felt to boost the insulating properties of the wall, and used glue to secure it to the bamboo. The sound insulation of the wall would be achieved on three levels - through reflection, diffusion and absorption.

We planned for hexagonal panells on both sides of our strip system, although the inside surface would be perforated since we thought this would allow for sound trapping. We also liked the architectural effect produced with this approach, giving the occupant a little treat for entering the pod in the form of information about its structure.

Bellow are the connections that we investigated through this prototype, although we definitely plan to further develop these details in the coming weeks.

The material chosen for executing our model was carbonated bamboo, laser cut to form the cells and strip sections. The strip sections were connected using galvanised nuts and bolts and the cells attached using metal pegs. This solution drove us to consider use of an adaptible, clip-on system for the cells that could be used for flexibility.

We ran into a few issued during the fabrication process that informed our future strategy. The bamboo was very stiff and in order to assemble the model, we submerged the strips in boiling water to help them flex into the right position. We also realised that we had to gain more control over the script in order to produce a seamless skin of hexagonal cells. We have been experimenting with kangaroo and planarisation forces in order to resolve this problem.

Connection details

B.6. Technique: Prototypes

Strategy for acoustic insulation

Isometric drawing of assembly elements

Tethers + Cells

B.6. Technique: Proposal Design proposal for an acoustic pod We imagined our pod as divided to achieve an organic flow of space rather than just a rigid division. We strived to achive this dynamic with a system of spaces - a main meeting place to facilitate the meeting of up to five people, with satelite micro-pods organised around it that could accomodate only one person at a time. We strive to create a space that seems safe but not claustrophobic, intimate but well lit and to, of course, satisfy a certain level of acoustic performance.

Our idea was to combine strips for structural support and hexagonal patterning for encosure.

We really wanted to challenge the idea of what the acoustic pod could be by including transitional spaces, and adding volume to our protective wall.

The base of our concept is biomimetic design and we are really interested in extracting the hidden rules of organisation from the worldâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s most efficient builder - nature. Cells always strive towards the optimum volume/area of perimiter ratio, and it is rules ike this that we wish to further explore in our future development.

We would aso like to achieve a cetain level of flexibility with our design that would allow for simple installment and use. The space we would design would be a pleasant and friendly one, constructed responsibly using sustainable materials. We think that natural materials are inherently beautiful and trustworthy, and we think that they play an integral role in our design.

We have learned a lot about our proposal during the prototyping phase and plan to further refine our design in light of these realisations.

Concept diagrams

B.7. Learning Objectives and Outcomes Coping with computational design Over the past few weeks we have had the opportunity to work intensively on developing our knowledge of grasshopper and its multitude of components and plugins, and have achieved a certain level of proficiency with the tools.

However, what I found the most challenging aspect of using grasshopper in our design proposals is using computation as a tool for conception. Even though we have a fair understanding of the capabilities of the program, we are still developing our conceptual thinking with the aid of computational tools. I believe it is this kind of compatibility we still need to develop in the coming weeks of working on our desing.

A lot of important lessons were learned during the prototyping phase. Creation of a prototype demands from us to take into account things that we may have otherwise overseen. For our project, this was most of all material behaviour. We learned that next time we have to dedicate the time to exploring the material and how it behaves in certain conditions.

Even though we were working with computational tools, we were still doing design work, which, as always, remains a slippery task in the sense that invested time does not always mean producing satisfactory results. Time management is key with this kind of work and I find my own organisation slowly but steadily improving.

After the feedback recieved during our interim presentation, we have a good idea of how we need to proceed with refining our desing, and look forward to the new and unexpected outcomes we will achieve through further exploration and research.

Part C_

C.1. Design Concept Feedback and Final Concept After recieving feedback for part B, we were focused on resolving isues that arose while devising our first proposal while building on the stronger aspects of our design. The elements of our design that we decided to keep were the material choices, biomimetic principles, as well as the strong emphasis on creating a truly acoustically insulating enclosure.

The main issue we ventured to resolve was a technical one - that translated into the formal character of our design. Inspired by the hexagons formal and organisational properties in a grid, we strove to enclose our space with a series of hexagonal panels of a natural material that would be a reflector of sound. The solution we provided in part B did achieve this effect esthetically to some degree, however it failed to form a compact structural system, which we thought was integral to our attempts to acoustically insulate the space.

The organisational approach to our pod also needed to change after being informed by the space available. We had to reduce our breakaway standing pods to one, situated close to the wall and away from the main circulation area of the office. We chose to join these to forms with an arching of the membrane in order to convey a sense of organic coherence while creating a small micro environment that would present a transitional space towards the inside of the pod.

Originally, we envisioned a multitude of these breakaway sections, that would create a more complex network of interior/exterior/transitional spaces, but we still thought that the single small pod registered as either a limb-like extension of the larger one, or rather as a second unit formed by some kind of mitotic process that has not completely ended yet, leaving them connected.

We understood that the hexagonal panels would need to rest on a uninterrupted surface of felt that would completely wrap around the space of the pod. When we understood the geometric limitations of defining a volume with an unstrechable fabric, we made our first step towards achieving a solution. We started expirementing with physics simulations that would help us achieve a satisfying form while keeping it developable. By cross-sectioning the abilities of the physics simulation with our design criteria, we achieved our final form.

When we were introduced to the limitations of the site, we understood that we would have to reimagine what the envelope would be. Striving to achieve an organic curvatious form that would convey a sense of growth, we decided to think of an â&#x20AC;&#x153;upside-downâ&#x20AC;? approach, with the widest section of our pod being at the ceiling, tightening as it reaches the floor, minimising the footprint while increasing the interior space of the pod.

Full-height volumes connected by an arching segment

C.1. Design Concept

Exterior elevation - Scale 1:50 - Exterior protective shell - Growth and dependance

Section A-A - Scale 1:50 - Interior scaling of cells - Vulnerability

A

A

Plan view - Scale 1:50 - Organisation of spaces - Standing / Sitting

C.1. Design Concept

C.1. Design Concept

C.1. Design Concept Defining Rib Curvature & Form Finding

Reference: Starting Mesh

Making the Ribs (Perpendicular to the Lofted Surfaces)

Reference: 2 Adjacent Surfaces Curve (Mutual Edge)

Orient Mesh Faces Separate Mesh Edges According to Direction Planarisation of Mesh Quads Springs Stiffness Depending on Direction Unary Forces to Sculpt Curvature

Kangaroo Solver for Mesh Generation

Divided points used for Closest Points on the Surfaces Find and add Surface Normals Multiply Vector Forces Moved Points of Original Divided Curve using Vectors

Divide the Mesh Into Strips Interpolate to Find a Curve Isolate Curves to Prep for Ribbing Loft Curves and Offset for Thickness Interpolate a Curve from Vertices Correct Directional Irregularities Loft to enclose space Loft external Edges of Ribs for Internal and External Surfaces

C.1. Design Concept Mapping Hexagonal Pannels from Planar to Curved Surface Reference: Hexagonal Cells for Panneling Surface for Panneling

Making the Wall Openings

Reference-In Surface to Cut Divide Curve

Unroll Surface Specify Points Relevant Correct UV Directional Irregularities Align Unrolled Surface with Original Surface

Region Intersection between the Unrolled Surface Edges and the Hexagon Curves Offset to Define edge of Region Extrude Curve and Cap Found Centroid and Surface Closest Point to the Centroid

Evaluated Unrolled Surface at these UV Parameters

Evaluate Original Surface at these UV Parameters

Used the Frames to Orient the Geometry from the Unrolled Brep to the Original

Make a Vector From One Point to itâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Corresponding Index on Opposite Edge

Range and Graph Mapper to Multiply the Vectorâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Intensity

Move Points with calculated vectors Find Surface Closest Point then Interpolate the Curve on the Surface

C.1. Design Concept Planing the Construction Process While developing our design we strived to achieve an interesting form using an inovative structural system, while still relying on simple and inexpencive materials. The most expensive material is the carbonated bamboo we imagined would be a suitable option for the hexagonal panels, considering its high visual grade. We also wanted the building process to be easy and fun.

We imagined that the main structural element of our pod would be ribs made out of timber sections. These sections would have to have a slight spacial curvature which we imagined could be achieved by steam-treating the timber.

Once the timber ribs are constructed and secured to the top and bottom plates, the felt pieces would be ready to be installed. Before putting the felt on, the timber hexagonal panels would be glued to the felt using the laser cut-out as a template.

The felt, covered by the timber clamping panels would then be assembled by threading bolts through the holes of the materials and then fastening them with a nut. The material order from bolt head to nut is: Panel - Internal Felt - External Felt - Rib - External felt - Internal Felt - Panel This fixing process would be preformed on each rib untill completion.

Washers should be used for a more equally distribution of load.

We devised the detail for our pod with the clamping panels deeper than the pod ribs in order to create a crevice in which the lights could be fitted. the light cover can also be fixed with the other materials using the nuts and bolts as we did in our model.

The seating we imagined would be fitted in our

pod would be of a simple circular configuration with a table in the middle. The standing pod would have a small standing desk. Another advantage of our hollow, double layered system is that all the electrical/communication services needed for the pod can be threaded though the pannel walls to be brought dirrectly to the occupant in an inconspicuous manner.

C.1. Design Concept

Interior Panels

Section Detail - Scale 1:5 Felt Strips

Exterior Panels

Plan Detail - Scale 1:5

Timber Ribs

Isometric Deconstruction of Main Elements

Elevation Detail - Scale 1:5

C.2. Tectonic Elements & Prototypes Testing Geometries and Configurations We started from prototyping the composite material that would become the felt and timber hexagon panels. This was because the hexagonal panels were part of our core concept, and we had to thoroughly understand the skin we were planing to use to enclose the space. Only after that could we think about how the supporting structure should work.

We used carboard and paper prototypes at first for easier modeling since they together achieved the structural characteristics of the composite material we wanted to use. We were also very impressed with the forms the material could achieved when gathered together, however since we could not think of a way to parametrically define these configurations in a way that suited our brief, we had to abandon this idea.

We discovered from the prototype the kind of distance we wanted to use with our panels to allow for the curving of the felt, but also to achieve a certain esthetic quality. In this phase we also decided to go back to our original idea of scaled hexagons, and that the felt is the primary material that would define the geometry of the pod, after which the timber panels would be glued on for encosure.

Once we developed our geometry, we made another prototype made from cardboard to simulate the structural ribbing. This was to check if when assembled the ribs and unrolled enclosing surfaces really do form the geometry from the digital space.

During this prototype we realised the need of clamping on either side of the rib in order to provide a smooth ending of the felt. This was also our first model representing the overall shape, and we liked the idea of the atmosphere a structure like this would create in a 1:1 scale. We also contemplated the use of noggins which in the

end we understood were unnecessary since the pod would be carrying minimal loads, and any minor deviances in the spacing of the ribs could be corrected with the tension of the felt.

Testing Material Properies and Effects After our cardboard models, we started analysing the materials for our final detail model. At this point we had a clear idea of what we expected of our materials and what we wanted them to look like, so we were ready to investigate wether they fit this criteria.

We were planning on using veneer bamboo for our 1:20 model of the whole pod, however we encoutered trouble straight away during the laser cutting when the camber in the bamboo led to inaccurate results. The members that were created were very fragile and broke under the slightest bending force. We also had some of our very small panels fall through the laser bed although that would not be an issue with the 1:1 model of course, but it is an issue to note.

We ended up re-cutting our rib pieces in carbonated bamboo. Carbonated bamboo did not handle torsion perfectly, but it performed better than the bamboo veneer.

After the bamboo we tested the behavior of felt under extreme tension. We found that felt under extreme tension behaves plastically and necks slightly. However, we were pleased to know the felt could slightly increase in length since this could compensate for any minor discrepancies between the modeled geometry and the 1:1 structure.

C.3. Final Detail Model Finalising our Structural System We ended up deciding to produce two final models, one 1:20 deconstruction model of the whole form and one 1:1 detail model.

Making the 1:20 model did not go quite as planned since the small scale of the elements made them difficult to work with in order to produce a clean, precise model. Also, the small scale of the model meant that the wood grain was too big to accomodate the spatial torsion we were subjecting the ribs to. We hope that even though the model failed to achieve a high degree of accuracy still succeeds in communicating to the observer what the main elements of our envisaged structure are and how the erection would transpire if it was to be built in a 1:1 scale.

We were overall very satisfied with the visual effects the 1:1 detail model achieved and how easily we constructed it. It really was a fun and interesting process. We also strived to communicate how the lighting in our pod would work by fitting one of the ribs with simple LED strip lighting. We did however discover that there were some small inacuracies with the placement of the holes for the nuts and bolts to go into, which would be easily corrected if we were to continue experimenting with our design. Apart from this issue, we thought the 1:1 model met all of our expectations and requirements of a structural system that we feel could easily be brought to the full form of the pod.

C.4. Learning Objectives and Outcomes Completing the Journey After our final presentation and critique we realised that while trying to conform to the limitations of the site and achieving a high level of pragmatism we ended up making a bit of a compromise in regards to our formal innovation. If we were able to further develop our design, the overall form would be the main thing we would focus on and experiment with.

Although we were satisfied with the hexagonal patterning, this is also something that we would like to experiment with further. Unfortunately, after spending so much time analysing the developability and construction of the geometry we ended up with no time to fully dedicate ourselves to this patterning. The interior lighting is also an issue that could be solved differently. We think that the lighting is an important element of the pod since it is completely enclosed and would strongly impact the inside atmosphere of the pod.

The goal is to achieve a confortably bright environment that would be enjoyable for people to use.

The objective of the studio was to educate us on the creative techniques of parametric design, how it can inform the conception and fabrication processes. I feel that working on this project greatly informed my overall view of contemporary design discourse and was a step forward in defining my own personal definition of design. I enjoyed working in this studio as well as with my partner Holly Gates very much, and am very happy that we provided a solution to the brief that we are both proud of and would continue working on for further development.

Thank you for this excellent opportunity for learning.

Sincerely, Djuro Djuranovic

Appendix - Algorithmic Sketches

Appendix - Algorithmic Sketches

Appendix - Algorithmic Sketches

Appendix - Algorithmic Sketches

Bibliography American Institute of Architects, The Dixon Water Foundation Josey Pavilion (2017) <http://www.aiatopten.org/node/476> [accessed 11 August 2017].

Construction Specialties Inc, Adaptive and Dynamic Buildings â&#x20AC;&#x201C; The Future of Environmental Design & Architecture (2010) <http://www.archdaily.com/71450/adaptive-and-dynamic-buildings-%25e2%2580%2593-the-future-of-environmental-design-architecture> [accessed 11 August 2017].

Fry, Tony, Design Futuring: Sustainability, Ethics and New Practice (Oxford: Berg, 2008).

Gage, Mark Foster, Architecture that Challenges your Concept of Reality, (2016) <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7v5hmQt57lc> [accessed 11 August 2017].

Gozak, Andrei, Andrei Leonidov, Ivan Leonidov : the complete works (London: Academy, 1988).

Hansmeyer, Michael, Michael Hansmeyer Computational Architecture (2017) <http://www.michael-hansmeyer.com> [accessed 11 August 2017].

Iwamoto, Lisa, Digital fabrications: architectural and material techniques (New York: Princeton Architectural Press, 2009).

Kolarevic, Branko, Architecture in the digital age: design and manufacturing (New York: Spoon Press, 2003).

May, Kate Torgovnick, Architecture infused with fractals: how TED speaker Ron Eglash inspired architect Xavier Vilalta (2013) <http://blog.ted.com/architecture-infused-with-fractals-ron-eglash-and-xavier-vilalta/> [accessed 11 August 2017].

Oh, Eric, EmTech TWISTs Plywood at the Timber Expo in Birmingham (2015) <http://www.archdaily.com/775842/emtechs-twist-displayed-at-the-timber-expo-in-birmingham> [accessed 11 August 2017].

Ostwald, Michael J., Josephine Vaughan, The fractal dimension of architecture (Cham: Birkhäuser, 2016).

Peters, Brady, 'Computation works : the building of algorithmic thought ', Architectural design, 83.2, (2013), (p. 8).

Zaha Hadid Architects, Thallus Installation (2017) <http://www.zaha-hadid.com/design/thallus-installation/> [accessed 11 August 2017].

List of Figures Part A Figure 1-3. Ivan Leonidov, Ivan Leonidov : the complete works (London: Academy, 1988).

Figure 4-6. Dror Baldinger, (Unknown) <http://www.aiatopten.org/node/476> [accessed 11 August 2017].

Figure 7-9. Gonzalo Guajardo, (2016) <http://www.archdaily.com/789535/lideta-market-vilalta-arquitectura> [accessed 11 August 2017].

Figure 10-12. Mark Foster Gage Architects, (2016) <http://www.mfga.com> [accessed 11 August 2017].

Figure 7-9. Gonzalo Guajardo, (2016) <http://www.archdaily.com/789535/lideta-market-vilalta-arquitectura> [accessed 11 August 2017].

Figure 10-12. Mark Foster Gage Architects, (2016) <http://www.mfga.com> [accessed 11 August 2017].

Figure 19-21. Michael Hansmeyer, (2010) <http://www.michael-hansmeyer.com> [accessed 11 August 2017].

Figure 12-14. Zaha Hadid Architects, (2010) <http://www.zaha-hadid.com/design/thallus-installation/> [accessed 11 August 2017].

Part B Figure 1-2. David Yeow, (2011) <http://hatzarchitects.blogspot.com.au/2011/04/paradise-drive.html> [accessed 15 September 2017].

Figure 3-4. Guillaume Blanc, (2012) <https://theverymany.com/12-atelier-calder/> [accessed 15 September 2017].

Figure 5-6. Gramazio & Kohler, (2011) <http://www.archdaily.com/260491/public-toilets-gramazio-kohler> [accessed 15 September 2017].

Figure 7-8. SHoP Architects, (2010) <http://www.archdaily.com/65311/botswana-innovation-hub-shop-architects> [accessed 15 September 2017].